Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
Bauder recommends to go short in San Diego real estate
My comments in Post #25 apply to years before 2007. My comments in Post #27 are not correct. The law changes apply to foreclosures as well as loan modifications in 2007, 2008, and 2009.— October 11, 2008 10 a.m.
Bauder recommends to go short in San Diego real estate
The law change applies to debt forgiven in 2007, 2008 or 2009.— October 11, 2008 9:34 a.m.
Bauder recommends to go short in San Diego real estate
The tax law change does not help debtors who walk away from their homes and mail the keys back to the bank. Debtors in this situation must recognize debt relief income unless they meet the insolvency exception. Debtors also have several other ways to dodge taxes on debt relief income but most are able to qualify for the insolvency exception. The tax law change applies to debtors who receive loan modifications (for example a permanent reduction in loan principal balance) that enable them to remain in their primary residences and continue making mortgage payments. Debt forgiveness in this situation is not taxable to the debtor. The tax law change does not apply to owners of commerical and rental properties.— October 11, 2008 9:31 a.m.
Bauder recommends to go short in San Diego real estate
Forgiven loan debt on a primary residence is generally not taxable in a short sale. The debtor does not recognize taxable debt relief income unless the debtor is rendered solvent by the debt discharge. And the amount of taxable debt relief income is limited to the extent the debtor is solvent after the discharge. If a debtor stiffs the bank for $200,000 in foreclosure and after the $200,000 debt discharge the debtor has a $10,000 net worth (assets minus liabilities), the debtor's taxable debt relief income is limited to only $10,000. Most debtors are insolvent after the discharge. The debt relief rules for commercial and rental properties are far more generous and most property owners are insulated from debt relief income.— October 10, 2008 11:22 p.m.
Superb NY Times Story Tells How U.S. Economic Leaders, Particularly Greenspan, Failed To See Possibility of Derivatives Chain Reaction
Greenspan says he took no action against derivatives because Wall Street would have moved offshore if the government had attempted to regulate derivatives. I also believe that the City of San Diego's unfunded pension liability has swelled from $1.2 billion to $2.75 billion, and the city will file bankruptcy in 2009. City employees should steel themselves for a 25% or more pay cut in coming months.— October 9, 2008 7:50 p.m.
House Was Right to Reject Deceptive Wall Street Bailout. One That Comes Later This Week Must Protect Taxpayers
I believe the correct way to deal with the financial crisis is to force profitable companies like Microsoft, Home Depot etc. to acquire and recapitalize struggling financial institutions at no cost to the taxpayer. They can afford it. Bill Gates should be held accountable for the financial crisis on Wall Street. He should have realized the situation was out of control and acted to force Congress to curb the excesses before it was too late. Warren Buffett should also be held accountable because he failed to use his wealth and influence to halt the financial excesses. Both Gates and Buffett should have hired armies of lobbyists to convince Congress to stop the excesses. If billionnaires like Gates and Buffett cannot act responsibly then their wealth should be confiscated.— September 30, 2008 9:39 p.m.
House Was Right to Reject Deceptive Wall Street Bailout. One That Comes Later This Week Must Protect Taxpayers
The government should start offloading insolvent banks on the Fortune 500. For example, the FDIC should have unloaded Washington Mutual on Microsoft Corporation in a shotgun merger at no cost to the taxpayer. Microsoft would then become liable for Washington Mutual's debts and assume responsiblity for turning it around. Microsoft could afford it with its $50 billion cash hoard. Home Depot, with its $40 billion cash hoard should also be forced into a shotgun merger with an insolvent bank. The FDIC could transfer Indymac to Home Depot and force Home Depot to foot the tab for Indymac's bailout sparing taxpayers. There are many other corporations with large cash holdings who could bail out failed institutions at no cost to the taxpayer.— September 29, 2008 8:25 p.m.
House Was Right to Reject Deceptive Wall Street Bailout. One That Comes Later This Week Must Protect Taxpayers
The government should finance the bail out by issuing $700 billion in ten year bonds. The bonds would be repaid over ten years by increasing the tax bite on large corporations by $70 billion per year. The money would be reserved for retiring the bonds. The Fortune 500 could easily handle a $70 billion annual tax increase. Congress should also impose a 70% excise tax on CEO salaries in excess of $500,000.— September 29, 2008 8:15 p.m.
Paulson's socialistic plan to bail out Wall Street is election year fraud
Buffett could never be elected President. He is a self-proclaimed atheist and a foundation he organized in his late wife's name contributes money to abortion organizations.— September 26, 2008 10:58 p.m.
Paulson Raked in $27 Million a Year While Heading Goldman, Says Expert Graef Crystal, Who Opposes the $700 Billion Bailout and Also Opposes Compensation Controls
I think Paulson sought the Secretary of the Treasury position in 2006 because he needed to diversify and sell his $500 million stake before Goldman cratered. If he tried to sell his stock while he was CEO, he would have faced investor lawsuits when the stock price eventually cratered. The lawyers would claim he acted on insider information and defrauded investors. So he sought a government position so he could claim the sale was triggered by conflict of interest laws, not insider knowlege of Goldman's poor financial prospects. Paulson received a license to steal.— September 25, 2008 8:30 p.m.